I have yet to find a Christian forum that wasn’t dominated by the literalist/inerrantist/fundamentalist segment of Christendom. IMO, it makes meaningful discussion nearly impossible. This is certainly a legitimate segment of Christendom, but it’s essentiallty kindergarten-level Christianity. Science, scholarly biblical criticism, serious theology and everything else that doesn’t mesh with the literalist/fundamentalist/inerrantist perspective provokes either anger or cocksure literalist/fundamentalist/inerrantist responses: “All you need to know about THAT is what [I and my pastor think] GOD HIMSELF SAID in Genesis 1.”
I suppose the other main problem is that staggering percentage of Christians who don’t or can’t accept that their beliefs are simply that - beliefs, not knowledge. These folks HAVE to be right and you HAVE to be wrong; their own faith and perhaps mental health hinges on them being RIGHT and you being WRONG. Again, it becomes tedious and makes meaningful discussion impossible.
All the Christian forums seem like well-meaning efforts, but they do seem to me to very one-dimensional and plagued by the above two problems. Perhaps you disagree or don’t think they are problems?
And if you are a progressive Christian, you are considered to be apostate by many. But yes, every forum I have seen has a fundie slant.
One forum I perused was Calvinist only.
I was “TOSSED” for quoting Bart Ehrman in another. Same forum I was warned about criticizing the Bible when referencing Biblical criticism.
That being said, this forum has been rather tolerant of me. Others were not. Hard to have a conversation when my salvation is constantly called into question.
The risk of being tossed always seems to be on the part of the non-literalist/fundamentalist/inerrantist. The L/F/I position always seems to be the default position for a Christian forum and its administrators/moderators. L/F/I is assumed - quite incorrectly, I believe - to be the “real” Christianity, with everything else viewed as iffy and suspect. Those who don’t play the L/F/I game are always at risk of posting a last straw that offends someone of the L/F/I persuasion and gets them bounced. It never seems to work the other way.
To participate on a forum, I think you need either some expectation of benefitting from it or some expectation of benefitting others by your participation. The L/F/I dominance tends to frustrate both expectations. Participation becomes more like beating your head against a wall (“But it feels so good when I stop!” as the old joke goes).
I’m not being entirely critical or negative. This forum seems well-intentioned and, as you say, fairly tolerant - but it’s quite new with not a lot of participants, yet already we see the L/F/I arrogance rearing its head.
The constant quoting of scripture far out of context, without any regard for scholarship in regard to language, historical context, or ancient culture is very frustrating. And a forum is not set up to use as a classroom to explain the proof texting errors.
engaging in discussions with those who think in black and white, who think depression is demonic possession, or that Christian’s cannot disagree on any issue is futile. But I try anyhow when I have time.
I have yet to meet any KJV only folks here, or “Jesus is my boyfriend “people. Also: the Patriarchal, head covering, natural birth, eat your placenta women are not here. I was in a small forum that was overrun with them after the original Crosswalk shut down.
Hopefully. This forum will go on being a mostly pleasant place to engage in conversation on a variety of issues.
Wasn’t that a huge forum? I expect it was hard to manage. I lurked there a bit, but honestly prefer a smaller group. I do remember people had their own personal thread. Sort of like houses in a neighborhood. I haven’t seen that elsewhere.
I recently read an article by Clarence Haynes addressing the issue of Women in Leadership, he was neither agreeing or condeming it but was making the point that most people were pretty dug in on both sides of the argument. What he did say was that if debatable issues caused disunity in the body of Christ , then we have a bigger problem than agreeing or disagreeing about women in leadership, or anyother issue for that matter. We will never agree on everything and never will but unity in the body is paramount.
Has there EVER been anything resembling “unity in the body” over the past 2000 years? The disunity is right there in Paul’s epistles, and pre-Nicene Christianity was disunity exemplified. Great Schism, Reformation, yada yada - when has there ever been anything resembling unity?
Hence, the game is to narrow the definition of the body of Christ (people like me) to the point where those whose versions of Christianity we dislike simply aren’t part of the body of Christ. Voila, disunity with them is not only OK but what God wants because they are purveyors of false doctrine. But even this doesn’t work because even most denominations and even many churches are scarcely models of unity.
Given the fractured state of Christendom, and the vehemence with which doctrinal and social issues are debated, what would unity in the body even LOOK like? Isn’t it just a meaningless platitude, like saying we love people and groups we clearly detest?
Great post! I agree that this is a common plague among Christian Forums. Many people think that unity requires conformity and that it is impossible to have any sort of diversity exist in the tent that is the Father’s house. I disagree with that premise. It’s a big tent.
Having said that-- I haven’t yet found that to be the case here. I think that the Admin @Fritzpw_Admin is making a strong effort to allow conversations that certainly some of those L/I/F folks would find objectionable, in just the way that you find their perspectives objectionable. Perhaps it’s too soon to paint with such a broad brush.
One thing that must be understood, is that when you come into their house-- (synagogue) you have to play by their rules.
You think you have had problems?
Imagine Jesus trying to converse with the L/I/F’s in his day. Of course he was kicked out, banned, and far worse of course. Imagine also if he didn’t persist despite the strong opposition to what had to have been uncomfortable conversations he would have held almost every day.
The people whose beliefs veer from literal to bazaar tend to wash ashore in all forums I have visited or been a part of. The most pitiful yet frustrating are, IMO, the “crunchy” patriarchy crowd. No one else is parenting right, or know how to be married correctly.
The superior attitudes are strange considering quite a few admitted to being on public assistance instead of working and using birth control. One woman crumbled online when her husband skipped out on her and seven kids.
Perhaps the Internet in general attracts those on the fringes since they can find each other and reinforce their beliefs. Forums are their megaphone.
Street corner soapbox/megaphone preachers are quite awful, but to each his own. I’ll defend their right to be there, while at the same time ignore them.
The worst imo, are not the folks shouting their message, but the ones shouting down others. The censorship crowd.
I’m lost. I keep using the Quote feature, and then the quote seems to disappear when I post my reply. Ditto when I try to use Copy - what I copy seems to disappear.
In any event, in reply to MrE’s use of the term “objectionable,” I would say i really don’t find any views objectionable - unless, I suppose, they are something like Muslim jihadism that leads to violence. Within the Christian context, I’m somewhat bewildered that anyone could buy into Mormonism, much of Catholicism, Young Earth Creationism or, for that matter, literalist/inerrantist/fundamentalism. All of these strike me as simply implausible to the point of being goofy - yet millions of intelligent, educated, seemingly sincere and kindly people believe each of them. They are simply implausible and unbelievable to me, but any of them could be more true than what I believe, none of them is really objectionable to me, and I have no authority to speak for how God views any of them.
